6x6 Neg Carriers: Glassless vs. Plain Glass vs. AN vs. Combo

[TheTrailTog]

I have a Durst M605. So far I have only printed 35mm with it. I have the 35mm masks for printing glassless, but have had no luck tracking down the 6x6 ones. Unfortunately, the original AN glass that the enlarger came with is scratched. I'm trying to decide if I want to have some masks custom made or buy some cut glass from Focal Point and if I go the glass route, should I get plain glass, AN, or a combo of the two.

I've been doing a bit of reading today in the archives here, but quite frankly it has left me even more uncertain as to which option I should choose. My personal experience in the past printing 6x6 was up to 11x14 (the largest I have ever printed) and glassless with an Automega B7.

I like glassless because of there being less dust issues, which is great for a basement "darkroom". However, seems from my reading that film bowing in the carrier will increasingly come into play the bigger the enlargement.

Since you all have much more experience than me, I'm curious as to which option you would choose if you were in my shoes. Thanks in advance for any input!

 

[Neal]

Dear Xia_Ke,

I have only used a glass carrier for 4x5 but I have purchased from Focal Point. I ordered a replacement set and the glass was flawless and fit perfectly.

Good luck,

Neal Wydra

 

[BMbikerider]

I use a LPL7700 and have the universal carrier as well as a 35mm and 6x6 glassles ones. If I use the glassless ones I cannot guarantee that the negatives remain in focus during exposure onto the paper. The Universal carrier has combination glasses, Anti Newton on top with plain below. With care any dust attracted by static can be avoided. I use an anti static spray about once a month (actually a common household spray cleaner in UK) and don't have a serious problem.

 

[bdial]

I have glass carrier, but only rarely use it. I've printed 6x6 with glassless carriers on a variety of enlargers, and I've never had a sharpness problem I could attribute to using a glassless carrier.
That said, for you getting a replacement glass might be the easier approach than getting a carrier fabricated.

 

[spijker]

I also have the LPL670 (=7700) with the universal glass carrier (AN top, plain bottom) and a diffusion head, no condenser. The dust thing that people are so afraid of is really a non issue for me. Before I put the negative in, I give the glass a wipe with the Ilford anti static cloth and a blow of air after. When the negative is in, I put the carrier on a (cheap Huion) light tablet first and inspect it with a magnifier. There is usually one or two specs of dust left but that can be removed easily. So within a few minutes, I can have a practically dust free negative & carrier in the enlarger. This by far outweighs the trouble I had with popping negatives in a Beseler 23C with a glassless carrier in the darkroom of the photo club that I used a few years ago. I print from 645 negatives.

In my case, the glass is thick enough that dust on the outside surfaces of the carrier is well out of focus so that it's barely visible on the print.

 

[TheTrailTog]

I have only used a glass carrier for 4x5 but I have purchased from Focal Point. I ordered a replacement set and the glass was flawless and fit perfectly.

Thanks Neal for the reassurance on Focal Point. Just placed an order with them

That said, for you getting a replacement glass might be the easier approach than getting a carrier fabricated.

Thanks bdial. I ended up ordering glass from FP and this was one of the main reasons for doing so.

I use an anti static spray about once a month (actually a common household spray cleaner in UK) and don't have a serious problem.

Thanks BMbikerider. What's that spray that you use? I use compressed air and a static brush, which has worked well so far.

...Before I put the negative in, I give the glass a wipe with the Ilford anti static cloth and a blow of air after. When the negative is in, I put the carrier on a (cheap Huion) light tablet first and inspect it with a magnifier. There is usually one or two specs of dust left but that can be removed easily...

...In my case, the glass is thick enough that dust on the outside surfaces of the carrier is well out of focus so that it's barely visible on the print.

Thanks spijker. Hadn't thought about that use for a light table! I typically will turn the enlarger light on and hold the carrier, loaded with the neg, underneath for inspection. The FP glass looks to be 2mm. I hadn't even thought about the thickness coming into play for some dust being out of focus.

 

[outwest]

With mine, I took the piece of AN glass out of a 6x6 GEPE slide mount and glued it to the inside of the top half of the carrier. Cheap, easy, and it works great.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Ditto. AN-glass Gepe slide mounts make an acceptable poor man's system. But I thought going glassless was abandoned back when people first learned to cook meat too, several hundred thousand years ago. Kinda primitive.

 

[bdial]

I've had a bias (not entirely reasonable, I admit) against glass carriers since trying to work with the one in my little Durst when I lived in the desert.
Because of the dryness, it was static city.
No amount of static spray, discharge guns, anti-static brushes, canned air or anything else could result in 6 surfaces that were clean of dust at the same time.
In the relatively moist North East it isn't nearly the problem, and I do use my glass carrier occasionally, without the necessity of hours of spotting.

Regarding Focal Point, great folks, haven't bought glass from them but did buy coatings for glass I already owned, and they did a superb job.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Well, in the desert you can simply mummify meat, so no need to cook it anyway. I think forced air heating some places can be even worse, though
clay playa dust can certainly play havoc. Here on SF Bay we have Newton-Ring hell due to the constant fog; but still, a precise glass sandwich is the only way to keep things precisely in focus.

 

[flavio81]

I am in the same situation as the OP, i don't have glass carriers for the 6x7 on my Durst M670.

What do you guys think about holding the negative with tape under tension on a glassless carrier?

 

[DREW WILEY]

I could never make tape work. I have a friend that does a pretty good job of it with 6x6. But removing tape residue seems like more fuss than simply
cleaning carrier glass.

 

[MartinP]

If the darkroom environment creates dust problems then perhaps a small humidifier and/or air-cleaner would help? At the very least, I'd suggest glass on top (use a glassless or simple fretted plywood underneath) with the AN/plain combination being sure to be flat. Alignment shouldn't be forgotten either of course - flat but wonky, isn't going to do you any favours.

 

[M Carter]

I got corner-to-corner sharpness with 6x7 negs on 16x20 prints, glassless, on a so-so Beseler 67c. (I did brace the top of the column to the ceiling and had to jury-rig some alignment stuff, including a DIY Besalign board).

This all can get a little "mac vs. pc, blondes vs. brunettes, best pizza in brooklyn" around here though. I have an MXT now and a glass carrier for 4x5, and have yet to get a 6x7 carrier, so I've been using the glass 4x5 with a cut-out mask of developed ortho film. Everything's nice and sharp, dust is certainly more of an issue.

I think the most important investment before a glass carrier is aligning your enlarger. Those see-into-the-corner focus magnifiers and a scratched-up neg are priceless for this.

And I told the wife and kids if they want to pitch in on an xmas gift for me... Versalab Parallel please!

 

[Ian Grant]

I've used Durst enlargers since 1975 when I got my first M601. I have plain glass, anti newton glass and glass-less masks but in practice prefer plain glass on the underside and a glass-less frames for 35mm or 120 in the top. I've never had any sharpness issues and I'm quite critical.

Ian